IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI WRIT PETITION No.13786 of 2008 DATED: 26^th MARCH, 2026 Between B.Somaiah …Petitioner AND The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Hanamkonda Depot, Warangal District …Respondent

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition, aggrieved by the Award dated 15.02.2000 passed by the Labour Court, insofar as it directs the appointment of the petitioner as a fresh recruit and imposes the penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect.

02. Heard Sri P.Venkateshwar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Chandra Sekhar.N, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, appearing for respondent and perused the record.

03. The petitioner joined the service of RTC as a Conductor in the year 1990, and his services were regularized in the year

1993. He was removed from service by order dated 16.06.1994 on the ground that he had issued seven tickets bearing Nos.080/894980 to 986 of Rs.2.75 denomination to seven individual passengers who boarded the bus at Warangal Stage No.1, with a slight invisible punch in ‘UP’, and failed to account for these issues in S.R. No. A0/3578748, dated 18.11.1993, against the Stage No.3. He also failed to show the ticket issues as ‘7’ and did not clearly write ‘987’ from Warangal to Fatima Nagar, Stage Nos.1 to 15. It was alleged that he intentionally wrote the due amounts on the reverse of some of those tickets so as to conveniently take back and re-issue the same, thereby defrauding the legitimate revenue of the Corporation. The petitioner further failed to observe the T.I.C. point at Mission Hospital and failed to collect fare and issue tickets to four passengers who boarded the bus at Mission Hospital bound for Laxmi Talkies (Ex-Stage 9/7 to 3) and were found travelling without tickets at Ashoka Talkies, Stage No.9/7. After conducting an inquiry, the petitioner was removed from service. The appeal and revision preferred by him were also rejected. Aggrieved thereby, he approached the Labour Court. Upon consideration of the matter, the Labour Court ordered reinstatement of the petitioner; however, he was directed to be treated as a “fresh recruit,” and one increment was stopped with cumulative effect after reinstatement. Aggrieved by the denial of continuity of service with all consequential benefits and back wages, the petitioner has approached this Court.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the course of the inquiry, the petitioner was not supplied with the based and relevant documents of both the charge sheets thus the respondent-corporation has violated the regulations 12 of the Employees CCA Regulations. It is further contended that the checking officials failed to follow the instructions of the Corporation issued in MTD-267, which require that the statement shall be attested by the service driver and two independent witnesses, and that the TTIs shall record the correct postal addresses of the alleged passengers. However, only with a view to frame charges against the petitioner, the said procedure was not followed. It is also contended that in the absence of a list of witnesses, the charge sheet itself is illegal. The petitioner further submits that the TTIs failed to collect material evidence and to make proper endorsements in the official records, such as the Statistical Return Check Report (MTD 43/R), and intentionally avoided eliciting the truth. The action of the respondent in not properly examining the evidence on record and in attributing guilt to the petitioner is stated to be contrary to the principles of natural justice and the CCA Regulations, 1987. It is also contended that the Labour Court, without appreciating the evidence on record in its proper perspective, denied continuity of service with all consequential benefits and back wages while ordering reinstatement. Accordingly, the petitioner prays that this Court may allow the wri